Linux is struggling on the desktop because it only has a small number of "great" apps, according to the Gnome co-creator. Miguel de Icaza, co-creator of the Gnome desktop, told tech journalist Tim Anderson at the recent Windows 8 Build conference "When you count how many great desktop apps there are on Linux, you can probably name 10," de Icaza said, according to a post on Anderson's IT Writing blog. "You work really hard, you can probably name 20. We've managed to p*** off developers every step of the way, breaking APIs all the time."

That said, I think there's plenty of "great" apps in Linux (and *BSD land) and any modern distribution makes for a fairly usable environment -- at least for the most common activities. It could be said that some of them are not as polished or as easy to use but, again, I value freedom most of all and I like the idea of an OS that's not controlled by a single entity. I don't know, maybe I'm a bit of an anarchist.

Basically what you're saying is that you're willing to put up with a lot of bullshit in exchange for freedom (or at least your version of it), and that's fine... I can't argue with you there.

But what many of us (both end users and developers) have been saying for years is that desktop Linux is a fragmented mess, and is a big reason why we want nothing to do with it.

Of course, some folks like it that way, and like I said before... that's fine. But in its current state, it's NEVER going to pick up any significant marketshare. So if you want to have stuff splintered in a hundred different directions, you're just going to have to live with the marketshare you have, and no amount of whining about choice and 'Steve Balmer/Jobs is a seal-clubbing bastard' is going to change it.